Considering the troubled
launch of the government’s online health insurance marketplace, it will take
more than the promise of the internet to improve the nation’s healthcare
system. It will also take smart design, says David Fore, executive director of Lybba, a nonprofit Los Angeles design firm focused
on healthcare collaboration.

Lybba’s philosophy is “We design like your life
depends on it.” What does that mean?

We’re at a time in the
design industry and the healthcare industry where the two need to meet and work
out a way to go forward. Healthcare in this country is encumbered by a business
model that isn’t serving many people’s needs -- particularly given the amount
of money we spend for these services. You’re looking for opportunities for
change.

One of the main objectives
of Lybba is to design as if your life depended on it. You should put into your
work the same kind of energy you put into the well being of your family. That’s
what the message means.

Lybba is working to make healthcare more
collaborative through efforts such as mobile apps and portable medical records.
Talk about why healthcare needs to be more collaborative.

The increasingly common use
of the internet creates way too much information for any single doctor -- much
less patient -- to take in. You see the rise of the expert patient. If they’re
the sort of patient that has the motivation and capacity, they’ll deeply
research their own condition and do comparative work. Increasingly, people are
looking for ideas that can help with research and the exchange of information
and the cultivation of new healthcare collaborations.

Healthcare is one of the holdout
industries in terms of the radical transformation that the internet can create.
Patients are using social media. They’re doing problem solving and tracking
sophisticated self-experimentation. There’s this sort of authority gradient in
healthcare that we’re all familiar with, whether we’re conscious of that or
not. The nonprofessionals have access to essentially the same research as their
professional counterparts and there’s an opportunity to bring people together.
These kinds of opportunities await the healthcare industry.

Talk about some of the specific projects you’re
working on around health.

One of the initiatives we’re
undertaking now is a shared decisions support product. We’re working on this
with a research hospital in Los Angeles. This is along the theme we’re focused
on at Lybba: designing infrastructure at the cross-current of patients’ lives while
improving research time. This shared decisions support system is meant to
facilitate conversations that are often difficult for patients and their
families. In this case, there’s a statistical model underneath the product that
helps illustrate to both clinicians and patients the likelihood of
complications depending on the choice you’re making. There are always tradeoffs
in serious chronic illness care and this tool makes it possible for people to
understand those risks and be able to make a choice that’s appropriate for
them.

We’re also working on C3N [a collaborative chronic care network, currently
focused on inflammatory bowel disease, that connects doctors, patients,
families, researchers and other stakeholders] where we have a network with
prototypes for serious chronic illness care. We want to correct the authority
gradient, so patients who have a lot of knowledge can interact with clinicians
and researchers. When you have a chronic illness you’ve been living with for a while,
you begin to get serious about the patterns in your life. Self-tracking is one
way to do this. But doctors are getting too much information from a small
number of patients who are tracking a lot of data. Patients come in with
concerns from the internet or they think they understand a pattern in their life,
but they aren’t trained to. Our infrastructure helps bring together the
clinical and patient world. If somebody is interested in seeing what effect
probiotics will have on them, they’re able to -- in a sense -- co-author studies
with their clinician. The clinician can help them track various kinds of
symptoms or incidents in their lives.

These experiments can be
applied over and over again. A physician could see what effect a probiotic has
on a number of his patients. He can create a virtual patient cohort of folks
testing out the effectiveness of probiotics. That clinician can share the
template of that experiment with his community of clinicians, who can then modify
it or take it as a whole. When you aggregate this data from people, you can
start to see the pattern in cross section against other characteristics, such
as age, time of diagnosis and genetics. That is the doorway to the notion of
precision medicine, personalized medicine. Clinicians aren’t apt to do a series
of experiments with each of their patients. If you can make the administration
of that easier, if you can make the data available, there’s a huge opportunity
there for reducing costs and improving quality at the same time.

One of the techniques you use at Lybba is interaction
design. What is interaction design and why is it better than other design
methods?

Interaction design is a
blueprinting process. It’s about how you design and build something taking into
account that fourth dimension: time. You include storytelling because it takes
place over time. It’s just not any story. It’s the story of people that are
most likely to use the product you’re designing. That requires research into
the lives of people, and in this case the lives of people who have some illness
or a doctor who is trying to improve the way he is providing care. The first
step is this deep research. Then we synthesize that information into personas,
fictional characters. When you’re working in software it’s easy for the
engineering mindset to prevail. What an interaction designer does is situate
the people at the center of the design choices. First and foremost, the design
is meant for them. You do that through telling stories.

For instance, when a
clinician looks at shared decisions support, they’re apt to think of it as an
event. When we did our research, we encountered many patients saying, ‘I say
yes or no to the doctor. Then I go home and worry about it. I think about it. I
start asking questions.’ We see it as a process. The design of the tool we’re
building is basically two modalities with similar information. One is the mode
where you’re in the examination room with your doctor. The story you tell is about
the doctor going through practical information that demonstrates your risks and
benefits, so the doctor can connect with the patient and the family members. That
material, including the doctor’s recommendation and other physicians’
treatments, have been shared with the family via the internet. Then they can
examine it more when they get home. Anybody who has been in a decision-making
situation in the physician’s office knows it’s a lot of information to take in at
once. You don’t always understand the information -- and you don’t even know
how to spell the words. It’s a process. When they get home, there are sharing
capacities too: ‘My brother-in-law knows something about this.’ This leads to
the additional resources beyond the information the doctor has provided. That
information goes back to the doctor, who sees the patient is concerned, for
instance, about a particular abstract risk. He can then talk to her about that,
so she can make the best choice.

What’s next for you and this work? Where do you see
this idea of collaboration in healthcare going?

A colleague of mine, Peter
Jones, recently wrote a book called Design for Care. He says there is a call to care that you can
respond to or not. I think that’s the truth. Novel technologies and data
repositories are inspiring us to realize what we never considered possible. As
we’re looking for greater efficiencies in healthcare and as computerization
becomes prevalent, there’s always the risk that you’re going to become a
number. Design methods shape these informational tools. Meanwhile, the quality
of relationships among clinicians, patients and family play a critical role in
determining the outcome.

Doctors are under a lot of
pressure these days. They’re not compensated the way they used to be and they
feel constrained by the amount of time they’re allowed to spend with patients.
So there’s a reticence about designing things for them because they don’t want
to spend a lot of time inputting data. There is a logjam of innovation in
healthcare and it has a lot to do with the prevalence of electronic health
records. That is my target going forward. There is a lot of work that hospitals
need to do to extract what is clinically relevant information out of this
record. It’s a shame, a bit of a tragedy even. Instead of using an IT-enabled
care management system that facilitates great communication with your patient,
doctors are using software that behaves like an accounting system. We’re trying
to deliver care that has all these qualitative characteristics, but we’re
encumbered by electronic health records that were meant for something else. That’s
the biggest opportunity we have out there.

Thank You

By registering you become a member of the CBS Interactive family of sites and you have read and agree to the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Video Services Policy. You agree to receive updates, alerts and promotions from CBS and that CBS may share information about you with our marketing partners so that they may contact you by email or otherwise about their products or services.
You will also receive a complimentary subscription to the ZDNet's Tech Update Today and ZDNet Announcement newsletters. You may unsubscribe from these newsletters at any time.